US Pays Asarco $15M To End Nebraska Superfund Cleanup Dispute
Dublin Core
Title
US Pays Asarco $15M To End Nebraska Superfund Cleanup Dispute
Subject
US and ASARCO dispute settlement
Description
In December of 2012, the US Federal Government and ASARCO reached a settlement in which the US agreed to pay ASARCO $15 million to end a long-lasting dispute about ASARCO’s true liability for the contamination of the Omaha Lead Site. This dispute was marked by ASARCO’s allegations that the United States EPA concealed and destroyed documents that investigated the contributions of guilty parties charged with the contamination of the Omaha Lead Site.
In ASARCO’s previous 2009 bankruptcy proceedings, the two parties had agreed on a $219.5 million settlement for the toxic contamination of Omaha soil. ASARCO however, later contended that this settlement exceeded the company’s true liability at the site and demanded a refund of its overpayment to the EPA. This demand was based on the claim that the Superfund site experienced lead contamination primarily because of lead-based paint from the surrounding housing stock, rather than the lead smelter that ASARCO had operated nearby. ASARCO claimed that the lead smelter “had been closed and fully remediated in an award-winning environmental cleanup”. It followed then, that the US Department of Housing and Urban Development was responsible for the lead contamination. If this claim held, then ASARCO’s legal and monetary liability to the Superfund site would be greatly diminished, and the EPA would be forced to return significant funds to ASARCO.
In the instigation of this dispute, ASARCO quoted emails in which the EPA project manager for the Omaha Lead Site “allegedly instructed his workers to delete emails related to the source of contamination at the site because they would likely be subject to the Freedom of Information Act and discovery requests later”.
The federal government disputed all allegations regarding fraud, overpayment of liabilities, misrepresentations, and improper nondisclosure by ASARCO. The federal government held that the original Omaha Lead Site Settlement was fair and accurately based, so as to rightly represent the level of contamination by ASARCO’s lead smelter. It was further contended that ASARCO’s lawsuit was untimely and “without factual or legal basis and contrary to the Omaha Lead Site settlement, and that [ASARCO] lacks standing”.
With the 2012 $15 million settlement, ASARCO and the federal government agreed to resolve all disputes related to the Omaha Lead Site. This $15 million settlement reduced the remediation funds that the EPA received for addressing the Omaha Lead Site to $204.5 million total.
This artifact is relevant to the EPA’s level of success, or rather, struggle for success in the adequate charging of guilty parties for Omaha’s lead contamination. This legal dispute is testament to the challenges of navigating the retribution of companies and corporations involved in environmental degradation, to whatever degree. Regardless of the contribution of residential lead-paint contamination to the overall severity of what became the Omaha Superfund Site, the presence of ASARCO and the detrimental effects of industrial lead exposure are undeniable.
This summary of the US and ASARCO dispute demonstrates the principal challenge the EPA faced in the naming of guilty parties and the subsequent challenge of charging for liabilities. While determination of liability presents several arbitrary decisions to be made and several holes to find in such decisions, fulfillment of the EPA’s goal to make responsible parties pay for clean-up was complicated by legal disputes like this.
In ASARCO’s previous 2009 bankruptcy proceedings, the two parties had agreed on a $219.5 million settlement for the toxic contamination of Omaha soil. ASARCO however, later contended that this settlement exceeded the company’s true liability at the site and demanded a refund of its overpayment to the EPA. This demand was based on the claim that the Superfund site experienced lead contamination primarily because of lead-based paint from the surrounding housing stock, rather than the lead smelter that ASARCO had operated nearby. ASARCO claimed that the lead smelter “had been closed and fully remediated in an award-winning environmental cleanup”. It followed then, that the US Department of Housing and Urban Development was responsible for the lead contamination. If this claim held, then ASARCO’s legal and monetary liability to the Superfund site would be greatly diminished, and the EPA would be forced to return significant funds to ASARCO.
In the instigation of this dispute, ASARCO quoted emails in which the EPA project manager for the Omaha Lead Site “allegedly instructed his workers to delete emails related to the source of contamination at the site because they would likely be subject to the Freedom of Information Act and discovery requests later”.
The federal government disputed all allegations regarding fraud, overpayment of liabilities, misrepresentations, and improper nondisclosure by ASARCO. The federal government held that the original Omaha Lead Site Settlement was fair and accurately based, so as to rightly represent the level of contamination by ASARCO’s lead smelter. It was further contended that ASARCO’s lawsuit was untimely and “without factual or legal basis and contrary to the Omaha Lead Site settlement, and that [ASARCO] lacks standing”.
With the 2012 $15 million settlement, ASARCO and the federal government agreed to resolve all disputes related to the Omaha Lead Site. This $15 million settlement reduced the remediation funds that the EPA received for addressing the Omaha Lead Site to $204.5 million total.
This artifact is relevant to the EPA’s level of success, or rather, struggle for success in the adequate charging of guilty parties for Omaha’s lead contamination. This legal dispute is testament to the challenges of navigating the retribution of companies and corporations involved in environmental degradation, to whatever degree. Regardless of the contribution of residential lead-paint contamination to the overall severity of what became the Omaha Superfund Site, the presence of ASARCO and the detrimental effects of industrial lead exposure are undeniable.
This summary of the US and ASARCO dispute demonstrates the principal challenge the EPA faced in the naming of guilty parties and the subsequent challenge of charging for liabilities. While determination of liability presents several arbitrary decisions to be made and several holes to find in such decisions, fulfillment of the EPA’s goal to make responsible parties pay for clean-up was complicated by legal disputes like this.
Creator
Juan Carlos Rodriguez
Source
Law 360
Publisher
Portfolio Media, Inc.
Date
December 12, 2012
Rights
All Content © 2003-2019,
Relation
The case is In re: Asarco LLC, case number 2:05-bk-21207, in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas.
Format
.pdf
Language
English
Type
Legal news article
Identifier
US Pays Asarco $15M To End Nebraska Superfund Cleanup Dispute
Collection
Other Media
Citation
Juan Carlos Rodriguez, “US Pays Asarco $15M To End Nebraska Superfund Cleanup Dispute,” History of Environmental Inequalities, accessed April 30, 2024, https://steppingintothemap.com/inequalities/items/show/37.
Document Viewer
Embed
Copy the code below into your web page